L-1B Remanded — Tire Mold Manufacturing (2024): the Director did not sufficiently consider new evidence

Decision Summary

The appeal was remanded because the Director did not sufficiently consider new evidence submitted on appeal or the petitioner's claim that the beneficiary developed new standardized procedures. The AAO determined that the petitioner needed to provide more specific, corroborated details to distinguish the beneficiary's knowledge as special or advanced compared to others in the industry. The case was sent back for further consideration and a new decision based on a more complete record.

Criteria Discussed

Sign up free to download the original PDF